Oscar De La Hoya vs Hector Camacho

‘Golden Boy’ Oscar De La Hoya retained the WBC welterweight championship by administering a one-sided 12-round beating to Hector “Macho” Camacho before an estimated crowd of 14,100 at the Thomas & Mack Center in Las Vegas. De La Hoya won by scores of 120–105 from Chuck Giampa, 120–106 from John Keane and 118–108 from Anek Hongtongkam. Camacho was knocked down in the ninth round and lost a point for excessive holding in the 12th. Both men weighed 147lb, with Richard Steele acting as referee.

The match brought together two of boxing’s most recognisable figures, though they occupied different stages of their careers. De La Hoya, 24, was unbeaten in 25 contests and had already won championships in four weight divisions. Earlier in 1997 he had defeated Miguel Angel Gonzalez, taken the welterweight title from Pernell Whitaker and stopped David Kamau in two rounds. Camacho, aged 35 and a former champion at super-featherweight, lightweight and light-welterweight, entered at 63–3–1. He had gone unbeaten in 21 contests since losing to Felix Trinidad and had recently stopped the 40-year-old Sugar Ray Leonard, but the same attacking ambition no longer accompanied the speed which once defined him.

De La Hoya assumed command from the opening bell. He advanced behind the jab, kept his feet beneath him and drove left hooks towards Camacho’s body. The Puerto Rican southpaw attempted to circle away and flick his right jab while moving, but De La Hoya’s reach and quicker reactions prevented him from establishing a safe distance. Whenever Camacho paused, the champion stepped across his escape route and attacked with combinations.

Camacho had brief successes in the second and fourth rounds, the only sessions any official awarded to him. His movement caused De La Hoya to miss occasionally, and he landed isolated right jabs or straight left hands before withdrawing. These were interruptions rather than changes in the contest. Camacho seldom remained in position long enough to follow one punch with another, while De La Hoya continued striking to the body and finishing his attacks with the left hook upstairs.

By the middle rounds, the pattern had become severe. De La Hoya began and ended many of his combinations with the left hand, varying hooks to the ribs with uppercuts through Camacho’s guard. The challenger’s main defence was movement, followed by a clinch whenever the champion closed the distance. Steele repeatedly separated them, but Camacho returned immediately to the same practice. He was difficult to hit cleanly for long sequences, yet he offered so little in return that there was no question which man controlled each round.

The ninth provided the only knockdown. De La Hoya opened the attack with a left uppercut which jolted Camacho backwards, then followed with right hands as the challenger lost his balance and fell to the canvas with approximately 35 seconds remaining. Camacho rose, held when De La Hoya rushed forward and reached the bell. His instinct for survival remained intact even when his legs and offensive resources had largely deserted him.

De La Hoya continued pursuing the knockout through the final three rounds. Camacho absorbed hard hooks to the body and was shaken again, but he used his experience to smother attacks, turn away and clinch. Giampa scored the tenth 10–8 for the champion despite the absence of a knockdown, reflecting the degree of De La Hoya’s superiority. In the last round, Steele finally deducted a point from Camacho for persistent holding. De La Hoya attacked until the bell, but Camacho refused to provide the stationary target required for a stoppage.

The statistics confirmed what had been plainly visible. De La Hoya was credited with landing 373 of 750 punches, a connection rate of 50 per cent, while Camacho landed only 124 of 687, or 18 per cent. The disparity in power punches was greater still: 340 for De La Hoya against 54 for the challenger. Camacho’s durability enabled him to complete the distance, but he had not mounted a serious claim to a single sustained portion of the contest.

De La Hoya received a guaranteed purse of $9 million and Camacho $3 million. The promotion generated approximately 560,000 pay-per-view purchases and $22.4 million in television revenue, substantial figures which reflected the drawing power of both names. The commercial success exceeded the match's competitive value. Camacho’s victory over Leonard had given the promotion a useful foundation, but Leonard had returned after nearly six years away and bore little resemblance to the fighter who had ruled the welterweights.

Camacho deserved credit for remaining upright after the ninth-round knockdown and withstanding De La Hoya’s body attack for the entire distance. He did not, however, put up the close or vigorous challenge suggested by some later summaries. His objective became survival, and the repeated holding drew both Steele’s warning and eventual penalty. The decision was beyond dispute, and even Hongtongkam’s 118–108 card was generous to the challenger.

For De La Hoya, the victory was his fourth of five world-title contests during a remarkably active 1997. He had been unable to force the knockout he wanted, but there was little else to criticise. He controlled a seasoned southpaw, cut off the ring with discipline and punished the body without becoming reckless. Camacho’s name supplied the occasion; De La Hoya supplied almost all the fighting.

I remember watching this and feeling terribly disappointed with Camacho. The young Macho had been electric—fast feet, sharp combinations and enough spite to embarrass good fighters. After beating an ancient Roberto Duran and a 40-year-old Sugar Ray Leonard, people convinced themselves some of that brilliance remained. It didn’t.

Camacho came to survive. He circled, flicked harmless jabs and grabbed whenever De La Hoya reached him. Oscar cut the ring off properly, stepping across rather than following, and punished the body with left hooks. Camacho’s southpaw stance presented no real puzzle because he offered nothing forceful enough to discourage the advance.

De La Hoya was excellent. His combinations often began and finished with the left hand, and the five-punch sequence that dropped Camacho in the ninth was top-class work. He remained patient without becoming cautious and landed three times as many punches.

What disappointed me was not that Camacho lost; at 35 against a prime De La Hoya, that was expected. It was his refusal to gamble when hopelessly behind. He even lost a point for holding in the final round. Camacho showed courage by taking the punishment, but very little ambition. Oscar beat the name comprehensively; the great version of Macho had disappeared years earlier.